• Questions about Camcorders on the Mac

    From Bible John@johnw_94020@yahoo.com to alt.video.vcr,rec.video.production,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.apps on Saturday, April 15, 2006 21:11:54
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

    I have a nice analog JVC camcorder. I know this camera cost about $700 back in 2001. Its okay, and certainly captures far superior video than any Palm Pilot, cell phone or digital camera. But anyways it uses VHS-C tapes, which can be easily played on my VCR with a VHS adaptor. Since VHS tapes are fear cheaper than VHS-C, I think I want to give people tapes rather than VHS-C tapes. But I am afraid, if I do this, and then erase over the VHS-C tape,
    the quality will deteriate. This seems to be what happens in many, but not all tapes. Will VHS-C have this effect, or will it not?

    Okay on to primary question.

    One day when I get the money I will buy myself a digital camcorder that will use Mini DV, DVD, or a hard drive.

    Does anyone have a digital camcorder and what are your experiences with it
    on your Macs? Can it play full frame video on your Mac? I cant imagine the file sizes of such video, and in my case there is no way such video would
    fit on my dinky 30GB hard drive, with only 6GB free on my ibook G4. I think
    I would need to attach my USB 2.x 80GB drive.

    With digital tapes, DVD's or hard drives, can you erase and the record over without a lowering of quality?


    Thanks,


    John

    PS- My JVC will work for a while, and I am not in a hurry to replace it,
    but perhaps one day it might be wise to get a smaller digital camcorder. I sure do hope the quality of these smaller digital camcorders, is camcorder quality, and not lame digital camera video quality. My JVC will floor my
    Kodak anyday for video.

    --
    1 Pet 3:15-But sanctify the Lord God[a] in your hearts, and always be ready
    to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear
    CERM-Church Education Resource Ministries
    Founder and director
    http://johnw.freeshell.org/bible


    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Richard Crowley@rcrowley@xpr7t.net to alt.video.vcr,rec.video.production,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.apps on Saturday, April 15, 2006 21:33:50
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

    "Bible John" wrote ...
    I have a nice analog JVC camcorder. I know this
    camera cost about $700 back in 2001. Its okay,
    and certainly captures far superior video than any
    Palm Pilot, cell phone or digital camera. But
    anyways it uses VHS-C tapes, which can be easily
    played on my VCR with a VHS adaptor. Since
    VHS tapes are fear cheaper than VHS-C, I think I
    want to give people tapes rather than VHS-C tapes.

    Most people have DVD players now. You can get a
    reasonably nice one for $50

    But I am afraid, if I do this, and then erase over the
    VHS-C tape, the quality will deteriate. This seems
    to be what happens in many, but not all tapes. Will
    VHS-C have this effect, or will it not?

    Yes, all tapes will wear out from repeated recording/
    playing/erasing, etc. At least analog tapes will gradually
    deteriorate so you can get some "advance notice" when
    it gets too bad to continue to use. With digital, you may
    never know when you have reached the limit until you
    record something and then find it won't play back.

    Okay on to primary question.

    One day when I get the money I will buy myself a
    digital camcorder that will use Mini DV, DVD,
    or a hard drive.

    Avoid DVD if you want to do any subsequent editing, etc.

    Does anyone have a digital camcorder and what
    are your experiences with it on your Macs? Can
    it play full frame video on your Mac?

    I don't have a Mac, but I can't imagine that it wouldn't
    play back full frame. Even if they are half as good as
    their fans claim they are.

    I cant imagine the file sizes of such video,

    DV video is 13.7 GB per hour. MPEG video is a
    fraction of that size, if you can live with the trade-
    offs.

    and in my case there is no way such video would
    fit on my dinky 30GB hard drive, with only 6GB
    free on my ibook G4. I think I would need to attach
    my USB 2.x 80GB drive.

    Even 80GB is a bit tight depending on what you want
    to do. Fortunately, hard drives are very cheap. These
    days you can't hardly even buy a drive as small as 80GB.

    With digital tapes, DVD's or hard drives, can you
    erase and the record over without a lowering of quality?

    MiniDV tapes cost ~$5 each. if what you are shooting is
    not worth $5/hour, you shouldn't subject your camera to
    the wear and tear of even turning it on.

    The mini-DVD cameras *may*(?) use re-writable
    discs, but the MPEG compression is barely adequate
    for casual distribution and doesn't hold up to any kind
    of post-production (editing, titles, effects, etc.) very
    well. Unless you have a considerably lower standard
    of quality than most of us.

    Hard drives, of course, can be re-written hundreds/
    thousands of times with no downside.

    Richard Crowley in rec.video.production
    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From zwsdotcom@zwsdotcom@gmail.com to alt.video.vcr,rec.video.production,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.apps on Saturday, April 15, 2006 21:37:10
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system


    cheaper than VHS-C, I think I want to give people tapes rather than VHS-C tapes. But I am afraid, if I do this, and then erase over the VHS-C tape,
    the quality will deteriate. This seems to be what happens in many, but not all tapes. Will VHS-C have this effect, or will it not?

    Any analog copy will lose quality. No way around this. Or do you mean
    that reusing an old tape is resulting in a lower quality for a fresh
    recording on old tape?

    If the latter, then it depends on your camcorder's erase heads and
    other issues such as track alignment. I'd suggest a bulk eraser to
    "clean" the tapes. However, since the media are in physical contact
    with the heads, you're also mechanically wearing out the tape every
    time it goes through the machine.

    One day when I get the money I will buy myself a digital camcorder that will use Mini DV, DVD, or a hard drive.

    If you intend to use this for archival purposes, I would avoid DVD.
    Rewritable optical media have an unproven shelf life.

    Does anyone have a digital camcorder and what are your experiences with it
    on your Macs? Can it play full frame video on your Mac? I cant imagine the

    *shrug* I have a cheap, cheap RCA (actually rebadged JVC) MiniDV
    camcorder with Firewire. I've had it for a few years, but don't use it
    much. My Mac mini can play back its output fullscreen but DV video
    takes a lot of disk space as you noticed. I've got a few important
    videos (my honeymoon, some tests of a rocket motor, etc) archived on
    tape.

    I also just bought a $88 digital palmcorder (MPEG-4) from Target the
    other day. It's also a "5MP" (really 3MP) digital still camera. The
    quality of this device is really quite good, mostly limited by the poor
    lens. It records directly on SD cards; a 256Mb card holds 80 min at low
    quality or 20 min at high quality. It also has TV-out (RCA cable
    included) so you can copy your recording directly to VHS tape if you
    wish. Unfortunately it stores the files in .ASF format, which is not
    very Mac-friendly if you were planning to view and edit files on the
    computer. Apart from that, it's extremely light and convenient.

    The specific camera I bought (Aiptek IS-DV) is visible at: <http://www.target.com/gp/detail.html/ref=br_1_7/601-5327497-5646540?%5Fencoding=UTF8&frombrowse=1&asin=B0006G332A>

    but it's much more expensive online than in the store. I paid about
    $120 including tax for the camera and a 256Mb Kodak SD card.

    As a side note, the camera uses an NP-60 Li-Ion battery with a quoted
    life of 90 minutes. This is apparently an industry standard size, I
    bought a set of two replacements on eBay for about $8.

    With digital tapes, DVD's or hard drives, can you erase and the record over without a lowering of quality?

    Yes to all of those, and also obviously to the flash memory cards I
    mention above. However in the DVD case, there is an erase lifespan, I'm
    not sure what it is.

    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Bible John@johnw_94020@yahoo.com to alt.video.vcr,rec.video.production,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.apps on Saturday, April 15, 2006 21:48:50
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

    --
    1 Pet 3:15-But sanctify the Lord God[a] in your hearts, and always be ready
    to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear
    CERM-Church Education Resource Ministries
    Founder and director
    http://johnw.freeshell.org/bible
    "Richard Crowley" <rcrowley@xpr7t.net> wrote in message news:1243i9gebnjup64@corp.supernews.com...
    "Bible John" wrote ...
    I have a nice analog JVC camcorder. I know this camera cost about $700 >>back in 2001. Its okay,
    and certainly captures far superior video than any Palm Pilot, cell phone >> or digital camera. But anyways it uses VHS-C tapes, which can be easily
    played on my VCR with a VHS adaptor. Since VHS tapes are fear cheaper
    than VHS-C, I think I want to give people tapes rather than VHS-C tapes.

    Most people have DVD players now. You can get a
    reasonably nice one for $50

    As do I. I have 3 DVD players.


    But I am afraid, if I do this, and then erase over the VHS-C tape, the
    quality will deteriate. This seems to be what happens in many, but not
    all tapes. Will VHS-C have this effect, or will it not?

    Yes, all tapes will wear out from repeated recording/
    playing/erasing, etc. At least analog tapes will gradually
    deteriorate so you can get some "advance notice" when
    it gets too bad to continue to use. With digital, you may
    never know when you have reached the limit until you
    record something and then find it won't play back.

    Okay on to primary question.

    One day when I get the money I will buy myself a digital camcorder that
    will use Mini DV, DVD, or a hard drive.

    Avoid DVD if you want to do any subsequent editing, etc.


    This is what I hear. But this may change in time.

    Does anyone have a digital camcorder and what are your experiences with
    it on your Macs? Can it play full frame video on your Mac?

    I don't have a Mac, but I can't imagine that it wouldn't
    play back full frame. Even if they are half as good as
    their fans claim they are.

    I cant imagine the file sizes of such video,

    DV video is 13.7 GB per hour. MPEG video is a fraction of that size, if
    you can live with the trade-
    offs.

    MPEG is light years ahead of the Windows Media format that my Palm Zire 72 uses. And even more light years ahead of crappy cell phone video.

    But then again Zire 72 movies can be posted to the web, and MPEG videos
    cannot without irritating many people (even those over broadband).


    and in my case there is no way such video would fit on my dinky 30GB hard >> drive, with only 6GB free on my ibook G4. I think I would need to
    attach my USB 2.x 80GB drive.

    Even 80GB is a bit tight depending on what you want
    to do. Fortunately, hard drives are very cheap. These
    days you can't hardly even buy a drive as small as 80GB.


    Too bad I bought it back in July of 2005.

    With digital tapes, DVD's or hard drives, can you
    erase and the record over without a lowering of quality?

    MiniDV tapes cost ~$5 each. if what you are shooting is
    not worth $5/hour, you shouldn't subject your camera to
    the wear and tear of even turning it on.

    The mini-DVD cameras *may*(?) use re-writable
    discs, but the MPEG compression is barely adequate
    for casual distribution and doesn't hold up to any kind
    of post-production (editing, titles, effects, etc.) very
    well. Unless you have a considerably lower standard
    of quality than most of us.

    My friend Brian does video editing, and for whatever reason he's attached to his old Amiga computer. He always has to convert the video with his capture card, but the videos do come out well.

    Check out one video. This video was produced back in 2001.

    http://johnw.freeshell.org/JWPaul.com/

    I am happy with the quality of that analog camera I bought for $700 in 2001.


    Hard drives, of course, can be re-written hundreds/
    thousands of times with no downside.

    Richard Crowley in rec.video.production


    They made video cameras that write to a hard drive?

    I heard there was a camcorder that wrote to a memory card, but I cant
    imagine how one would capture 60 minutes of video on any memory card sold today.


    John


    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Bible John@johnw_94020@yahoo.com to alt.video.vcr,rec.video.production,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.apps on Saturday, April 15, 2006 21:53:56
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

    --
    1 Pet 3:15-But sanctify the Lord God[a] in your hearts, and always be ready
    to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear
    CERM-Church Education Resource Ministries
    Founder and director
    http://johnw.freeshell.org/bible
    <zwsdotcom@gmail.com> wrote in message news:1145162230.804866.211570@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...

    Unfortunately it stores the files in .ASF format, which is not
    very Mac-friendly if you were planning to view and edit files on the computer. Apart from that, it's extremely light and convenient.

    My Zire 72 does the same. The video is crappy. I am able to play the video
    on my Mac with VLC.

    Why do you claim that .asf is good?

    There are 2 .asf videos on this page. Check them out. You must have low standards, if you think such a camera, could replace a analog camera.

    http://johnw.freeshell.org/bible/movies.htm



    The specific camera I bought (Aiptek IS-DV) is visible at: <http://www.target.com/gp/detail.html/ref=br_1_7/601-5327497-5646540?%5Fencoding=UTF8&frombrowse=1&asin=B0006G332A>

    but it's much more expensive online than in the store. I paid about
    $120 including tax for the camera and a 256Mb Kodak SD card.

    As a side note, the camera uses an NP-60 Li-Ion battery with a quoted
    life of 90 minutes. This is apparently an industry standard size, I
    bought a set of two replacements on eBay for about $8.

    With digital tapes, DVD's or hard drives, can you erase and the record
    over
    without a lowering of quality?

    Yes to all of those, and also obviously to the flash memory cards I
    mention above. However in the DVD case, there is an erase lifespan, I'm
    not sure what it is.



    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From zwsdotcom@zwsdotcom@gmail.com to alt.video.vcr,rec.video.production,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.apps on Saturday, April 15, 2006 22:03:37
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system


    Bible John wrote:

    Why do you claim that .asf is good?

    Er... where exactly do you see me claiming this? The only thing I said
    about it was that it's hard to work with on a Mac.

    ASF is a container file format, like AVI. It says nothing about the
    quality of the contents - that's set by the codec and bit rate. In the
    case of the VGA-resolution output from this particular camera, it
    happens to be MPEG-4 at approximately 176kbps (plus about 40kbps for
    the audio stream).

    After recording out to VHS tape, I suspect you could not tell much
    difference between a VGA-resolution MPEG-4 stream and a DV source,
    depending on the subject matter of course. (I don't have any analog
    equipment here, so I can't test this. I have, however, put the camera
    on my TV and observed the quality there. As you'd expect, the low bit
    rate leads to significantly worse artifacts in scenes with
    high-frequency components, particularly low light scenes).

    In my case, the convenience of immediate access and not needing to futz
    about with huge files, Firewire transfers and transcoding, is worth
    spending $100 for this camera. If I was making something that I wanted
    to look more professional, I'd use MiniDV for editability and
    distribute the finished product on DVD (or as MPEG-4 AVIs if this was
    for online use).

    I think pretty much by definition, any video that's going to be written
    out to VHS tape on consumer equipment qualifies as "quick snap quality"
    though.

    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Richard Crowley@rcrowley@xpr7t.net to alt.video.vcr,rec.video.production,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.apps on Saturday, April 15, 2006 22:08:41
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

    "Bible John" wrote
    "Richard Crowley" wrote
    Most people have DVD players now. You can get a
    reasonably nice one for $50

    As do I. I have 3 DVD players.

    As do your customers. (Which was my point)

    Avoid DVD if you want to do any subsequent editing, etc.

    This is what I hear. But this may change in time.

    The format that DVD video discs use is cast in concrete.
    I can't see anything that could be identified as a change
    in our lifetimes. It will take a whole new format (like
    "Blu-Ray") to change the state of DVD MPEG
    performance.

    MPEG is light years ahead of the Windows Media
    format that my Palm Zire 72 uses. And even more
    light years ahead of crappy cell phone video.

    Then you haven't seen MPEG that is compressed to
    the same rate as your Zire gadget.

    But then again Zire 72 movies can be posted to the
    web, and MPEG videos cannot without irritating
    many people (even those over broadband).

    Note that there are a very wide limits of encoding
    choices, bit-rates, etc. etc. for both MPEG and for
    WMV (and for Quicktime/MOV/MP4, and for RV)
    One must compare apples with apples for any kind
    of valid differential evaluation.

    They made video cameras that write to a hard drive?
    I heard there was a camcorder that wrote to a memory
    card, but I cant imagine how one would capture 60
    minutes of video on any memory card sold today.

    There is a pro HD format that will record 10-20 minutes
    on a swolen memory "card" that likely cost more than your
    whole camcorder. :-) Clearly made for short-form shooting
    (news, film-style features, etc.) rather than for any kind of
    long-form taping.
    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From PTravel@ptravel@travelersvideo.com to alt.video.vcr,rec.video.production,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.apps on Sunday, April 16, 2006 08:30:20
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system


    "Bible John" <johnw_94020@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1243gm86l5v78cb@corp.supernews.com...
    I have a nice analog JVC camcorder. I know this camera cost about $700
    back in 2001. Its okay, and certainly captures far superior video than
    any Palm Pilot, cell phone or digital camera. But anyways it uses VHS-C >tapes,

    VHS is limited to around 250 lines of resolution. MiniDV tops out at 525 lines. Sorry, but a VHS camera doesn't begin to approach the video quality
    of middle-of-the-line miniDV machine.


    which can be easily played on my VCR with a VHS adaptor. Since VHS tapes are fear cheaper than VHS-C, I think I want to give people tapes rather
    than VHS-C tapes. But I am afraid, if I do this, and then erase over the VHS-C tape, the quality will deteriate. This seems to be what happens in many, but not all tapes. Will VHS-C have this effect, or will it not?

    Tape consists of particles attached by a binder to a plastic tape. Repeated use of a tape causes the particles to flake off. This causes drop outs. If you care about the quality of your video, you should avoid re-use of tapes.



    Okay on to primary question.

    One day when I get the money I will buy myself a digital camcorder that
    will use Mini DV, DVD, or a hard drive.

    Does anyone have a digital camcorder and what are your experiences with it on your Macs?

    I don't have a Mac. I do have two digital camcorders.

    Can it play full frame video on your Mac?

    I'm not sure what you mean by "full frame." DV-25 (the standard used for miniDV) provides a frame that is 720 x 480 pixels (NTSC). If your Mac's screen has that much resolution (and it's hard to imagine any computer that doesn't at this point), then it will display the full frame.

    I cant imagine the file sizes of such video,

    13.7 gigabytes per hour.


    and in my case there is no way such video would fit on my dinky 30GB hard drive, with only 6GB free on my ibook G4. I think I would need to attach
    my USB 2.x 80GB drive.

    You definitely would.


    With digital tapes, DVD's or hard drives, can you erase and the record
    over without a lowering of quality?

    DVDs are write-once devices (and a poor choice for digital video,
    particularly if you want to edit). Hard drive - based camcorders can
    rewrite data until the drive dies. However, they, too, are a poor choice if you care about quality and want to edit. MiniDV tapes can be recorded over, but the more they are used, the more likely you are to experience dropout.



    Thanks,


    John

    PS- My JVC will work for a while, and I am not in a hurry to replace it, but perhaps one day it might be wise to get a smaller digital camcorder. I sure do hope the quality of these smaller digital camcorders, is camcorder quality, and not lame digital camera video quality. My JVC will floor my Kodak anyday for video.

    Your JVC won't approach my VX2000, which is better-than-broadcast quality. Your JVC also won't approach my old TRV-20, which is just a middling miniDV machine. If, by "digital camera video quality," you mean the video put out
    by still cameras, then, yes, just about any digital camcorder will do
    better.



    --
    1 Pet 3:15-But sanctify the Lord God[a] in your hearts, and always be
    ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope
    that is in you, with meekness and fear
    CERM-Church Education Resource Ministries
    Founder and director
    http://johnw.freeshell.org/bible



    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From David McCall@david.mccall@comcast.net to alt.video.vcr,rec.video.production,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.apps on Sunday, April 16, 2006 14:00:02
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system


    "Richard Crowley" <rcrowley@xpr7t.net> wrote in message news:1243kaporgl8fd1@corp.supernews.com...

    There is a pro HD format that will record 10-20 minutes
    on a swolen memory "card" that likely cost more than your
    whole camcorder. :-) Clearly made for short-form shooting
    (news, film-style features, etc.) rather than for any kind of
    long-form taping.

    Yeah, kind of like that other crappy format with short loads.
    What is they called it? I think they called it film :-)

    BTW, Happy Easter

    David


    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Bible John@johnw_94020@yahoo.com to alt.video.vcr,rec.video.production,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.apps on Sunday, April 16, 2006 08:43:24
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

    --
    1 Pet 3:15-But sanctify the Lord God[a] in your hearts, and always be ready
    to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear
    CERM-Church Education Resource Ministries
    Founder and director
    http://johnw.freeshell.org/bible
    "PTravel" <ptravel@travelersvideo.com> wrote in message news:wgn0g.2086$Lm5.1864@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com...

    "Bible John" <johnw_94020@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1243gm86l5v78cb@corp.supernews.com...
    I have a nice analog JVC camcorder. I know this camera cost about $700 >>back in 2001. Its okay, and certainly captures far superior video than >>any Palm Pilot, cell phone or digital camera. But anyways it uses VHS-C >>tapes,

    VHS is limited to around 250 lines of resolution. MiniDV tops out at 525 lines. Sorry, but a VHS camera doesn't begin to approach the video
    quality of middle-of-the-line miniDV machine.

    I know that. But since I am low on funds a VHS-C camera will do. I see
    tapes being sold nearly everywhere, so obviously there are millions of
    others who are using analog cameras.

    A trip to any Walmart, Target, Kmart, or many other places will prove my
    story true. Have you ever been in one of these stores and not been able to
    buy tapes of all types? For audio, standard audio tapes are useful for me, since they can record radio, which cannot be "easily" done with a CD. But I await the day of a CD-R boombox. But then again the tapes are small, and I could care less about editing them. Its just when I want to duplicate them,
    I find it hard fidning 2 tape boomboxes anymore. They used to sell 2 tape
    and CD boomboxes, but know such decks are only available in the more
    expensive stereo machines.


    which can be easily played on my VCR with a VHS adaptor. Since VHS tapes >> are fear cheaper than VHS-C, I think I want to give people tapes rather
    than VHS-C tapes. But I am afraid, if I do this, and then erase over the
    VHS-C tape, the quality will deteriate. This seems to be what happens in >> many, but not all tapes. Will VHS-C have this effect, or will it not?

    Tape consists of particles attached by a binder to a plastic tape.
    Repeated use of a tape causes the particles to flake off. This causes
    drop outs. If you care about the quality of your video, you should avoid re-use of tapes.


    Is it different with video than audio? With my Microcassette recorder, I
    have taped over a tape dozens of times, and the audio still sounds clear.


    Can it play full frame video on your Mac?

    I'm not sure what you mean by "full frame." DV-25 (the standard used for miniDV) provides a frame that is 720 x 480 pixels (NTSC). If your Mac's screen has that much resolution (and it's hard to imagine any computer
    that doesn't at this point), then it will display the full frame.

    I bought my ibook in May of 2005.


    I cant imagine the file sizes of such video,

    13.7 gigabytes per hour.


    How about per minute? My Kodak Digital still camera cant even compare to my analog JVC camcorder. But anyways files are about 20 megs a minute with
    that at 320x240 pixels.


    With digital tapes, DVD's or hard drives, can you erase and the record
    over without a lowering of quality?

    DVDs are write-once devices (and a poor choice for digital video, particularly if you want to edit). Hard drive - based camcorders can rewrite data until the drive dies. However, they, too, are a poor choice
    if you care about quality and want to edit. MiniDV tapes can be recorded over, but the more they are used, the more likely you are to experience dropout.

    They used to make VHS camcorders, and I believe that newspeople still use them. Perhaps this was a better format than DVD. I used one of these camcorders once in 1999 to film a trip to New York. It worked okay, but the video was not as clear nor the audio as loud as the Sony 8mm camcorder I purchased in 2001 for $700.




    Thanks,


    John

    PS- My JVC will work for a while, and I am not in a hurry to replace it, >> but perhaps one day it might be wise to get a smaller digital camcorder.
    I sure do hope the quality of these smaller digital camcorders, is
    camcorder quality, and not lame digital camera video quality. My JVC will >> floor my Kodak anyday for video.

    Your JVC won't approach my VX2000, which is better-than-broadcast quality. Your JVC also won't approach my old TRV-20, which is just a middling
    miniDV machine. If, by "digital camera video quality," you mean the video put out by still cameras, then, yes, just about any digital camcorder will do better.

    I know that. But my point was that my JVC camcorder produces MANY MANY MANY times superior video and audio than my Palm Zire 72, or any digital camera I have used. And this includes my old Vivitar, my current Kodak, my fathers Sony, the Mavica, and another Vivitar that I used.

    Of all these cameras, no question my current Kodak is the best, since the videos are stored in the .mov format. But for whatever reason digital
    cameras cant produce videos beyond 320x240.


    John




    --
    1 Pet 3:15-But sanctify the Lord God[a] in your hearts, and always be
    ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope
    that is in you, with meekness and fear
    CERM-Church Education Resource Ministries
    Founder and director
    http://johnw.freeshell.org/bible





    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Bible John@johnw_94020@yahoo.com to alt.video.vcr,rec.video.production,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.apps on Sunday, April 16, 2006 08:45:57
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

    --
    1 Pet 3:15-But sanctify the Lord God[a] in your hearts, and always be ready
    to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear
    CERM-Church Education Resource Ministries
    Founder and director
    http://johnw.freeshell.org/bible
    <zwsdotcom@gmail.com> wrote in message news:1145163817.373924.53880@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...

    Bible John wrote:

    Why do you claim that .asf is good?

    Er... where exactly do you see me claiming this? The only thing I said
    about it was that it's hard to work with on a Mac.

    Try VLC it works for me. How do these videos look on your machine? I'll bet they do not look much better than the videos the Zire 72 produces, whcih are great for web videos, but horrible for anything else.

    http://johnw.freeshell.org/bible/movies/Golden%20Gate.asf

    Go to my video page and download the Golden Gate bridge video.


    ASF is a container file format, like AVI. It says nothing about the
    quality of the contents - that's set by the codec and bit rate. In the
    case of the VGA-resolution output from this particular camera, it
    happens to be MPEG-4 at approximately 176kbps (plus about 40kbps for
    the audio stream).

    After recording out to VHS tape, I suspect you could not tell much
    difference between a VGA-resolution MPEG-4 stream and a DV source,
    depending on the subject matter of course. (I don't have any analog
    equipment here, so I can't test this. I have, however, put the camera
    on my TV and observed the quality there. As you'd expect, the low bit
    rate leads to significantly worse artifacts in scenes with
    high-frequency components, particularly low light scenes).

    In my case, the convenience of immediate access and not needing to futz
    about with huge files, Firewire transfers and transcoding, is worth
    spending $100 for this camera. If I was making something that I wanted
    to look more professional, I'd use MiniDV for editability and
    distribute the finished product on DVD (or as MPEG-4 AVIs if this was
    for online use).

    I think pretty much by definition, any video that's going to be written
    out to VHS tape on consumer equipment qualifies as "quick snap quality" though.



    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Richard Crowley@rcrowley@xpr7t.net to alt.video.vcr,rec.video.production,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.apps on Sunday, April 16, 2006 08:49:37
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system


    "Bible John" <johnw_94020@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1244p70dmk4sc6f@corp.supernews.com...
    --
    1 Pet 3:15-But sanctify the Lord God[a] in your hearts, and always be
    ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope
    that is in you, with meekness and fear
    CERM-Church Education Resource Ministries
    Founder and director
    http://johnw.freeshell.org/bible
    "PTravel" <ptravel@travelersvideo.com> wrote in message news:wgn0g.2086$Lm5.1864@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com...

    "Bible John" <johnw_94020@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:1243gm86l5v78cb@corp.supernews.com...
    I have a nice analog JVC camcorder. I know this camera cost about
    $700 back in 2001. Its okay, and certainly captures far superior
    video than any Palm Pilot, cell phone or digital camera. But anyways
    it uses VHS-C tapes,

    VHS is limited to around 250 lines of resolution. MiniDV tops out at
    525 lines. Sorry, but a VHS camera doesn't begin to approach the
    video quality of middle-of-the-line miniDV machine.

    I know that. But since I am low on funds a VHS-C camera will do. I
    see tapes being sold nearly everywhere, so obviously there are
    millions of others who are using analog cameras.

    A trip to any Walmart, Target, Kmart, or many other places will prove
    my story true. Have you ever been in one of these stores and not been
    able to buy tapes of all types? For audio, standard audio tapes are
    useful for me, since they can record radio, which cannot be "easily"
    done with a CD. But I await the day of a CD-R boombox. But then again
    the tapes are small, and I could care less about editing them. Its
    just when I want to duplicate them, I find it hard fidning 2 tape
    boomboxes anymore. They used to sell 2 tape and CD boomboxes, but
    know such decks are only available in the more expensive stereo
    machines.


    which can be easily played on my VCR with a VHS adaptor. Since VHS
    tapes are fear cheaper than VHS-C, I think I want to give people
    tapes rather than VHS-C tapes. But I am afraid, if I do this, and
    then erase over the VHS-C tape, the quality will deteriate. This
    seems to be what happens in many, but not all tapes. Will VHS-C have
    this effect, or will it not?

    Tape consists of particles attached by a binder to a plastic tape.
    Repeated use of a tape causes the particles to flake off. This
    causes drop outs. If you care about the quality of your video, you
    should avoid re-use of tapes.


    Is it different with video than audio? With my Microcassette
    recorder, I have taped over a tape dozens of times, and the audio
    still sounds clear.


    Can it play full frame video on your Mac?

    I'm not sure what you mean by "full frame." DV-25 (the standard used
    for miniDV) provides a frame that is 720 x 480 pixels (NTSC). If
    your Mac's screen has that much resolution (and it's hard to imagine
    any computer that doesn't at this point), then it will display the
    full frame.

    I bought my ibook in May of 2005.


    I cant imagine the file sizes of such video,

    13.7 gigabytes per hour.


    How about per minute? My Kodak Digital still camera cant even compare
    to my analog JVC camcorder. But anyways files are about 20 megs a
    minute with that at 320x240 pixels.


    With digital tapes, DVD's or hard drives, can you erase and the
    record over without a lowering of quality?

    DVDs are write-once devices (and a poor choice for digital video,
    particularly if you want to edit). Hard drive - based camcorders can
    rewrite data until the drive dies. However, they, too, are a poor
    choice if you care about quality and want to edit. MiniDV tapes can
    be recorded over, but the more they are used, the more likely you are
    to experience dropout.

    They used to make VHS camcorders, and I believe that newspeople still
    use them. Perhaps this was a better format than DVD. I used one of
    these camcorders once in 1999 to film a trip to New York. It worked
    okay, but the video was not as clear nor the audio as loud as the Sony
    8mm camcorder I purchased in 2001 for $700.




    Thanks,


    John

    PS- My JVC will work for a while, and I am not in a hurry to
    replace it, but perhaps one day it might be wise to get a smaller
    digital camcorder. I sure do hope the quality of these smaller
    digital camcorders, is camcorder quality, and not lame digital
    camera video quality. My JVC will floor my Kodak anyday for video.

    Your JVC won't approach my VX2000, which is better-than-broadcast
    quality. Your JVC also won't approach my old TRV-20, which is just a
    middling miniDV machine. If, by "digital camera video quality," you
    mean the video put out by still cameras, then, yes, just about any
    digital camcorder will do better.

    I know that. But my point was that my JVC camcorder produces MANY
    MANY MANY times superior video and audio than my Palm Zire 72, or any digital camera I have used. And this includes my old Vivitar, my
    current Kodak, my fathers Sony, the Mavica, and another Vivitar that I
    used.

    Of all these cameras, no question my current Kodak is the best, since
    the videos are stored in the .mov format. But for whatever reason
    digital cameras cant produce videos beyond 320x240.


    John




    --
    1 Pet 3:15-But sanctify the Lord God[a] in your hearts, and always
    be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the
    hope that is in you, with meekness and fear
    CERM-Church Education Resource Ministries
    Founder and director
    http://johnw.freeshell.org/bible






    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Michael Weinstein@notreallymeNOSPAM@ix.netcom.com to alt.video.vcr,rec.video.production,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.apps on Sunday, April 16, 2006 16:06:24
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

    On 2006-04-16 00:11:54 -0400, "Bible John" <johnw_94020@yahoo.com> said:

    I have a nice analog JVC camcorder. I know this camera cost about $700
    back in 2001. Its okay, and certainly captures far superior video
    than any Palm Pilot, cell phone or digital camera. But anyways it uses VHS-C tapes, which can be easily played on my VCR with a VHS adaptor.
    Since VHS tapes are fear cheaper than VHS-C, I think I want to give
    people tapes rather than VHS-C tapes. But I am afraid, if I do this,
    and then erase over the VHS-C tape, the quality will deteriate. This
    seems to be what happens in many, but not all tapes. Will VHS-C have
    this effect, or will it not?

    Okay on to primary question.

    One day when I get the money I will buy myself a digital camcorder that
    will use Mini DV, DVD, or a hard drive.

    Does anyone have a digital camcorder and what are your experiences with
    it on your Macs? Can it play full frame video on your Mac? I cant
    imagine the file sizes of such video, and in my case there is no way
    such video would fit on my dinky 30GB hard drive, with only 6GB free on
    my ibook G4. I think I would need to attach my USB 2.x 80GB drive.

    With digital tapes, DVD's or hard drives, can you erase and the record
    over without a lowering of quality?


    Thanks,


    John

    PS- My JVC will work for a while, and I am not in a hurry to replace
    it, but perhaps one day it might be wise to get a smaller digital
    camcorder. I sure do hope the quality of these smaller digital
    camcorders, is camcorder quality, and not lame digital camera video
    quality. My JVC will floor my Kodak anyday for video.

    I have a sharp miniDV camcorder. It records 1 hour on a $5 tape or 2
    hours in long play mode. It loads into iMovie by firewire and the video
    is full screen. I edit it in iMovie and then when I am happy with the
    result, I output it back to miniDV with no loss of quality, and store
    the tape. Then I use iDVD and make a DVD which plays full screen with
    full DVD quality on my computer or television using the ordinary
    household DVD player. Forget analog video tape UNLESS your aim is to distribute it to friends who have only VHS. Then I do what I said and
    copy the final miniDV that has come from the computer onto a VHS
    directly and give it to the poor technologically stunted relative.
    --
    Michael | "He's dead, Jim."

    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From PTravel@ptravel@travelersvideo.com to alt.video.vcr,rec.video.production,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.apps on Sunday, April 16, 2006 16:14:36
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system


    "Bible John" <johnw_94020@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1244p70dmk4sc6f@corp.supernews.com...
    --
    1 Pet 3:15-But sanctify the Lord God[a] in your hearts, and always be
    ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope
    that is in you, with meekness and fear
    CERM-Church Education Resource Ministries
    Founder and director
    http://johnw.freeshell.org/bible
    "PTravel" <ptravel@travelersvideo.com> wrote in message news:wgn0g.2086$Lm5.1864@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com...

    "Bible John" <johnw_94020@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:1243gm86l5v78cb@corp.supernews.com...
    I have a nice analog JVC camcorder. I know this camera cost about $700 >>>back in 2001. Its okay, and certainly captures far superior video than >>>any Palm Pilot, cell phone or digital camera. But anyways it uses VHS-C >>>tapes,

    VHS is limited to around 250 lines of resolution. MiniDV tops out at 525 >> lines. Sorry, but a VHS camera doesn't begin to approach the video
    quality of middle-of-the-line miniDV machine.

    I know that. But since I am low on funds a VHS-C camera will do. I see tapes being sold nearly everywhere, so obviously there are millions of others who are using analog cameras.

    There are miniDV camcorders for less than $300 that will produce better
    video than a VHS machine.



    A trip to any Walmart, Target, Kmart, or many other places will prove my story true. Have you ever been in one of these stores and not been able to buy tapes of all types?

    These stores are not exactly the benchmark for video.


    For audio, standard audio tapes are useful for me, since they can record radio, which cannot be "easily" done with a CD.

    A computer can do that. However, I use an MD recorder for audio.

    But I await the day of a CD-R boombox. But then again the tapes are
    small, and I could care less about editing them. Its just when I want to duplicate them, I find it hard fidning 2 tape boomboxes anymore. They
    used to sell 2 tape and CD boomboxes, but know such decks are only
    available in the more expensive stereo machines.

    You're duplicating radio programming? Okay, I'll spare you the lecture
    about copyright infringement. However, if you have a computer, you might
    want to look at a computer-based solution. Among other things, it would be automated, so you wouldn't have to sit there and push "RECORD" all the time.



    which can be easily played on my VCR with a VHS adaptor. Since VHS
    tapes are fear cheaper than VHS-C, I think I want to give people tapes
    rather than VHS-C tapes. But I am afraid, if I do this, and then erase
    over the VHS-C tape, the quality will deteriate. This seems to be what >>> happens in many, but not all tapes. Will VHS-C have this effect, or will >>> it not?

    Tape consists of particles attached by a binder to a plastic tape.
    Repeated use of a tape causes the particles to flake off. This causes
    drop outs. If you care about the quality of your video, you should avoid >> re-use of tapes.


    Is it different with video than audio? With my Microcassette recorder, I have taped over a tape dozens of times, and the audio still sounds clear.

    Yes, it's different. Audio is slow and the recording head moves linearlly. Video is fast and the recording head moves diagonally (technically, "helical scan"). Video tracks are much smaller and denser, i.e. there is far more information crammed into the same space. Because of this, drop out due to flaking is more of a problem on video than audio.



    Can it play full frame video on your Mac?

    I'm not sure what you mean by "full frame." DV-25 (the standard used for >> miniDV) provides a frame that is 720 x 480 pixels (NTSC). If your Mac's
    screen has that much resolution (and it's hard to imagine any computer
    that doesn't at this point), then it will display the full frame.

    I bought my ibook in May of 2005.

    Then it can play full frame.



    I cant imagine the file sizes of such video,

    13.7 gigabytes per hour.


    How about per minute?

    Well, I'm sure you can do the math.

    My Kodak Digital still camera cant even compare to my analog JVC
    camcorder.

    If you mean at recording video, I'm sure that's the case. If you want to record video, you need a digital camcorder. If you want to take still pictures, you need a digital still camera. There is no single device out there than can do both well.

    But anyways files are about 20 megs a minute with
    that at 320x240 pixels.


    With digital tapes, DVD's or hard drives, can you erase and the record
    over without a lowering of quality?

    DVDs are write-once devices (and a poor choice for digital video,
    particularly if you want to edit). Hard drive - based camcorders can
    rewrite data until the drive dies. However, they, too, are a poor choice >> if you care about quality and want to edit. MiniDV tapes can be recorded >> over, but the more they are used, the more likely you are to experience
    dropout.

    They used to make VHS camcorders, and I believe that newspeople still use them.

    Absolutely and unequivocally not. ENG is done with DVCAM, miniDVCAM and, in some instances Betacam and Digibeta. And the BBC uses VX2000/2001, a miniDV machine, for ENG.

    Perhaps this was a better format than DVD.

    It was not. However, you're confusing apples and oranges. VHS is both a recording medium and a delivery medium. DVD is a delivery medium -- the camcorders that use it as a recording medium are low-quality toys.

    I used one of these camcorders once in 1999 to film a trip to New York.
    It worked okay, but the video was not as clear nor the audio as loud as
    the Sony 8mm camcorder I purchased in 2001 for $700.

    VHS and 8mm both have roughly the same resolution. Hi8, however, was
    capable of 400 lines or so -- maybe that's what you had.





    Thanks,


    John

    PS- My JVC will work for a while, and I am not in a hurry to replace
    it, but perhaps one day it might be wise to get a smaller digital
    camcorder. I sure do hope the quality of these smaller digital
    camcorders, is camcorder quality, and not lame digital camera video
    quality. My JVC will floor my Kodak anyday for video.

    Your JVC won't approach my VX2000, which is better-than-broadcast
    quality. Your JVC also won't approach my old TRV-20, which is just a
    middling miniDV machine. If, by "digital camera video quality," you mean >> the video put out by still cameras, then, yes, just about any digital
    camcorder will do better.

    I know that. But my point was that my JVC camcorder produces MANY MANY
    MANY times superior video and audio than my Palm Zire 72, or any digital camera I have used. And this includes my old Vivitar, my current Kodak,
    my fathers Sony, the Mavica, and another Vivitar that I used.

    Well, yes -- digital cameras take still pictures and camcorders take video. Though many still cameras can produce video, and many camcorders can take stills, the compromises necessary for their primary function preclude their producing GOOD quality results.



    Of all these cameras, no question my current Kodak is the best, since the videos are stored in the .mov format. But for whatever reason digital cameras cant produce videos beyond 320x240.

    I've heard of a few that go up to 640 x 480 at 30 fps, but the resulting
    video is still far below even the cheapest miniDV camcorder in quality.



    John




    --
    1 Pet 3:15-But sanctify the Lord God[a] in your hearts, and always be
    ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope
    that is in you, with meekness and fear
    CERM-Church Education Resource Ministries
    Founder and director
    http://johnw.freeshell.org/bible







    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Richard Crowley@rcrowley@xpr7t.net to alt.video.vcr,rec.video.production,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.apps on Sunday, April 16, 2006 09:19:20
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

    "Bible John" wrote ...
    I know that. But since I am low on funds a VHS-C
    camera will do. I see tapes being sold nearly everywhere,
    so obviously there are millions of others who are using
    analog cameras.

    Yes, there are likely millions of others using analog cameras.
    But you have to ask yourself, "for what?" For shooting home
    movies of the kids playing in the wading pool in the back yard
    and the trip to the Grand Canyon? Or for video production
    where there will be several steps of post-production before
    the release format?

    Is it different with video than audio? With my
    Microcassette recorder, I have taped over a tape
    dozens of times, and the audio still sounds clear.

    Video and audio tapes are basically the same kind of
    thing, a thin magnetically sensitive coating on a plastic
    substrate. Note, however that video is much more
    demanding than audio. You can see defects more readily
    than you can hear them, and most particularly, because
    video uses very high-speed rotating heads to get the
    bandwidth required for video recording. This makes the
    expected lifetime of video tapes somewhat less than for
    audio.


    13.7 gigabytes per hour.

    How about per minute?

    13.7 GB/hour / 60 min/hour = 228.3 MB/min
    Remember that this is the standard DV codec.

    My Kodak Digital still camera cant even compare to my
    analog JVC camcorder. But anyways files are about 20
    megs a minute with that at 320x240 pixels.

    You are comparing the novelty "video" from a still
    camera to a real video camera. There are LOTS of
    different codecs for video. You comparison is not
    particularly meaningful.

    They used to make VHS camcorders, and I believe
    that newspeople still use them.

    No, newspeople *never* used VHS, except maybe in
    Hoople, North Dakota or somewhere in the back woods.
    They started out with 16mm film, then went to 3/4"
    U-Matic, then Betacam, and slowly converting to DV
    as their Betacams die.

    Perhaps this was a better format than DVD.

    VHS and DVD are roughly equivalent. 8mm video
    is slightly better. Any of the proper digital video
    formats are very significantly better.

    The novelty "video" produced by still cameras is
    not even in the same category and is not comparable.

    See Adam Wilt's "arrogant" rank scale for formats... http://www.adamwilt.com/DV-FAQ-tech.html

    I know that. But my point was that my JVC camcorder
    produces MANY MANY MANY times superior video
    and audio than my Palm Zire 72,

    Your Zire gadget produces HIGHLY COMPRESSED
    video files. You are comparing apples and kelp.

    Your Zire gadget would likely rank 1.5 or lower on
    Adam Wilts scale of 1 to 10.

    or any digital camera I have used. And this includes
    my old Vivitar, my current Kodak, my fathers
    Sony, the Mavica, and another Vivitar that I used.

    You appear to be suffering from the confusion that
    still cameras that produce novelty "video" are some-
    how comparable to real video cameras. They are not.
    The cheapest $150 mini-DV camera will run rings
    around a $1500 still camera that makes "video".

    Of all these cameras, no question my current Kodak
    is the best, since the videos are stored in the .mov
    format. But for whatever reason digital cameras
    cant produce videos beyond 320x240.

    Those are all still cameras. They produce "video"
    only as a marketing novelty. Nobody shoots real
    video on still cameras. They are FORCED to
    compress the life out of the video because they have
    such a limited amount of space to store the data.
    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From nobody special@msu1049321@aol.com to alt.video.vcr,rec.video.production,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.apps on Sunday, April 16, 2006 10:24:49
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

    Oh, I've seen small market news departments that used to shoot and post
    on s-vhs, and a few that went to digital-s, but they all dropped those
    some years ago. A few wedding type guys still use digital-s, but not
    many I know of. Most pros nowadays shoot some variant of DV25 or DV50,
    like DVCAM or DVCPRO, unless they are still using their betaSP gear,
    wich is long ago paid for and gives a good image... The folks on the
    bleeding edge are trying to use HDV, but I think many of us pros are
    still on the fence about that format and waiting for things to settle
    some more.

    Back to the original poster: A canopus ADVC-100 converter between your
    existing JVC VHS camcorder or deck and your mac's firewire port will
    let you play your VHS tapes into the mac, converted in real time to DV,
    edited on the mac and played back out thru the same converter to VHS,
    you can distribute VHS copies as good as the original generation VHS
    was. Keep the Edited output and even the raw footage on DV tape for an
    archive, and you will be able to use your limited hard drive space over
    and over. For your needs, Bible John, this is the best of both worlds.

    The thing you have to think about is, a converter like the ADVC-100
    costs $300 new, and only does one function, conversions, and a new
    low-end DV camcorder that can do that same on the fly conversion work
    with analog inputs ALSO costs about $300. Maybe you can find an
    ADVC-100 on Ebay for half that price, but they remain so popular, I
    have yet to find one that cheap. If you buy the Dv camcorder for about
    $300, you will have your choice of two camcorders to go out with, and
    I'll wager the Dv one will have a better picture than the VHS one does.
    Plus, you will be able to use it to bring VHS footage into your mac,
    and output edited high-quality home movies back out of the mac, thru
    the camcorder, and out of it's analog -output into a VHS recorder for distribution to your friends and family. That's a win-win-win. I'd
    look at the Canon ZR series or maybe the Elura series Dv camcorders.
    Make sure it has firewire, (almost 100% do now) plus analog in and out.
    With this you will be set for a couple years at least. As others have
    said, eschew the camcorders that record direct to a mini-DVD. These
    will bring you nothing but sorrow and regret, especially if you want to
    try and edit with them later. Plain low-end Dv tape camcorders are
    perfect for your needs.

    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113